Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!spar!baba
From: baba@spar.UUCP (Baba ROM DOS)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: re: Free will: there ain't no Sanity Clause
Message-ID: <511@spar.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Sep-85 04:42:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.511
Posted: Tue Sep 10 04:42:53 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 20:06:32 EDT
References: <1495@pyuxd.UUCP> <2197@pucc-h> <1510@pyuxd.UUCP>
Organization: The Institute for Impure Science
Lines: 16

>They have "only" had one very general (yet very specific) definition:
>the ability of human beings (or possibly some other sentient organisms)
>to make decisions "freely", independently, without the constraints of
>either the impositions of the external environment upon them. The implications
>of that are that that list of constraints includes those constraints found
>within the brain (those of course being the result of accumulated experiences
>we acquire interpreted and collated based on previous accumulated experiences
>we acquire interpreted and collated based on ...).
>
>          				Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr

It would appear that Rich views the constraints "found within the brain"
as "impositions of the external environment".  If the brain is external,
what on No-One's material Earth is *internal*?

						Baba